Ukrainian Crisis: Future Suspended

Economic interests and geopolitical contest for influence were the factors that drove to the unsolvable current situation in Ukraine. A series of actions like Russia's annexation of Crimea, a territory which till recently belonged to Ukraine, and the occupation of government buildings by pro-russian protesters in the eastern part of the country increases fears of civil war and provokes threats of war between Ukraine and Russia.

In Kiev, a wave of demonstrations called Euromaidan, began after President Viktor Yanukovich refused to sign the EU Association agreement. These antigovernment protests were led by heterogeneous groups of people that varied from pro-europeans to nationalists and ultra-conservatives, and finally culminated in a coup d'etat which toppled the Ukrainian government. But what was happening in the capital was far different from the real challenges that the country was facing at the time.

A significant minority of the Ukrainian population are Russians or use Russian as their first language. Besides, the former President Victor Yanukovych had a clear reorientation towards Russia during his mandate. When Putin offered what it seemed to be a very attractive deal to Ukraine, Yanukovych turned down the European deal right away and started considering the Russian deal, which was backed up by the Russian speaking population.

Russia promised to buy $15 billion worth of Ukrainian Eurobonds, an amount that would help Kiev to repay some $17 billion of debt it will face next year. The other part of the deal, naturally, concerned natural gas. Putin promised Ukraine a generous discount. Under the accord, the Russian state-controlled gas monopoly, Gazprom, would cut the price for Ukraine by about one-third (from $400 per 1,000 cubic meters to about $268 per 1,000 cubic meters). It is left up to speculation what Kiev promised Moscow in return, but what stays clear is that this kind of deal was a matter of political influence for Russia, rather than its own economic interests. Making Ukraine part of the Customs Union was part of Moscow's plans for the future.

Ukrainian citizens were "trapped" between two different agreements from two powerful actors in the region that would not so easily give up on Ukraine as a future ally. So a big question arose. European Union or Customs Union? Ukrainian demonstrators in Kiev and western Ukraine chose to wave the European flag in the Euromaidan, even though euroscepticism is now stronger than ever in the EU because of the austerity measures imposed on various countries and despite the fact that the EU deal would probably be harmful for Ukraine's economy and raise gas prices in the domestic market.

The street protests were perfectly manipulated by the opposition that was only interested in its own political upswing. There wasn't any effort to start peace talks with the government while the opposition was granted full support by the EU and the USA. All these facts led to a series of events characterised by the continuous violation of the domestic Ukrainian law, as well as the international law.

First of all, the vote to remove Yanukovych doesn't seem to have followed constitutional procedures. According to Article 111 of the Ukrainian constitution, the President can only be impeached from office by parliament through "no less than three-quarters of its constitutional composition." On February 22nd, 2014 the Ukrainian parliament voted 328-0 to impeach President Yanukovych who fled to Russia the prior night. However, for an effective impeachment under constitutional rules the 449-seated parliament would have needed 337 votes to remove Yanukovych from office.

This creates a serious problem of legitimacy for the interim government and all its dealings with foreign governments. The deal with the IMF for an aid package that will force the country to unsustainable austerity measures, is specially put into question. The current interim government, openly supported by the West, was also widely criticised for its composition. The ultra-right Svoboda Party, a political party with neo-nazi connections scored key positions in the government of Arseniy Yatsenyuk. Moreover, the referendum over Crimea's status, after Russia took control of the region, was a clear violation of international law. Article 73 of the Ukrainian constitution also states: "Alterations to the territory of Ukraine shall be resolved exclusively by the All-Ukrainian referendum". 93% of Crimean voters have backed joining Russia and seceding from Ukraine but the rest of Ukraine was not allowed to vote over the fate of the peninsula.

But in fact, Moscow did not care about legitimacy. Actually, Putin found all the right excuses to strengthen his position. He called the change of the Ukrainian government an "anti-constitutional coup and a military seizure of power" and appeared the defender of the Russian speaking minority from a "fascist government", a name given to the interim government by Russian media for Svoboda's role in it.

Crimea's annexation, although not recognised by international community, is a reality but it is not even close to a solution. It only proves the incapability of the West to compromise in certain aspects with Russia to avoid the latter. Adding to that, EU foreign ministers not even agreed on economic sanctions against Russia because of their dependance on Russia's energy resources.

At the same time, Kiev faces its own economic and political challenges. On one hand, the terrible economic situation in Ukraine will supposedly be solved with an agreement with IMF for an aid package that in reality will require more sacrifices by the people. On the other hand, the seizing of administration buildings in the eastern Ukrainian city of Donetsk by Pro-Russian separatists who proclaimed the region an independent republic, and the recent shootout in the region in which at least 3 people were reported killed, indicates that the Geneva international agreement will not provide peace in the region. Meanwhile, as diplomacy continuously fails, the future of Ukraine takes the leap into the dark.

Director

Konstantina Kostami is co-founder of Open Society and researcher on Democratization and Development in the Arab/Muslim world at the Complutense University of Madrid.

Education

Ph.D. in Political Science at Complutense University of Madrid, M.Sc. in International politics at the Complutense University of Madrid, B.Sc. in International and European Economic Studies at the Athens University of Economics and Business

Languages

English, French, Spanish, Arabic, Greek

Email This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Follow Us

Get Published

+ Archives

Legal Note

opensocietyoline.com includes links to both internal and external websites which are selected to be editorially relevant to the content they are linking from. Open Society Online cannot be held responsible for the content of external links, third party content that is published on the website or cited references.